ILC Detector R

1
ILC Detector RD

• Motivated by Outstanding Physics Opportunity
• Advanced Technical Challenges
• Global Collaboration on Detector RD
• Coordination with Accelerator RD of GDE
• Detector Concepts Report
• Planning for Detector Concepts Beyond the DCR
  (post 2006)

2
ILC Physics Goals

• EWSB
• Higgs
• Mass (50 MeV at 120 GeV)
• Width
• BRs (at the few level)
• Quantum Numbers (spin/parity)
• Self-coupling
• Strong coupling (virtual sensitivity to several
  TeV)
• SUSY particles
• Strong on sleptons and neutralinos/charginos
• Extra dimensions
• Sensitivity through virtual graviton
• Top
• Mass measured to 100 MeV (threshold scan)
• Yukawa coupling
• W pairs
• W mass

3
ILC Experimental Advantages
Elementary interactions at known Ecm eg. ee- ?
Z H beamstrahlung
manageable Democratic Cross sections eg. ? (ee
- ? ZH) 1/2 ?(ee - ? d d) Inclusive
Trigger total cross-section Highly Polarized
Electron Beam 80 ( positron
polarization RD) Exquisite vertex
detection eg. Rbeampipe 1 cm and ? hit 3
mm Calorimetry with Particle Flow Precision
?E/E 30-40/?E Advantage over hadron collider
on precision meas. eg. H ? c c

• Detector performance translates directly into
  effective luminosity

4
ILC Detector Challenges

• ILC physics places premium on jet measurements
  and tagging, in an environment where event
  reconstruction is possible
• tth ? 8 jets
• hZ ? 2l 2 jets, 4 jets
• hhZ ? 2l 4 jets, 6jets
• Aim to fully reconstruct final state
• SUSY, quark, t tagging,
• lepton/hadron id
• Vertex precision complements
• calorimetry
• Precision tracking needed for
• decay-mode independent Higgs
• detection
• e e ? Z H
• Z ? ll-
• H ? anything

Mj3-j4 vs. Mj1-j2
5
ILC Flavor Tagging Challenge

• SLD comprised 307 Mpixels with lt 4 mm point
  resolution over entire system

• billion pixel vertex detectors with 3 ?m pt.
  res., and 0.1 X0 ladders, being developed

SUSY (2 Higgs Doublet Model)
S. Yamashita
6
Detector RD Required

• Performance requirements for ILC Detector exceed
  state-of-the-art
• Calorimeters with 100 million cells
• Jet resolution goal 30/ ?E
• Pixel Vertex Detector with 109 ? 20 mm
  pixels
• Impact parameter resolution 5µm ? 10µm/(p
  sin3/2?)
• Tracking resolution
• High Field Solenoid 5 Tesla
• High quality forward tracking systems
• Beamline Instrumentation
• RD Essential in order to realize these
  capabilities in a timely way

7

• The GDE Plan and Schedule

2005 2006 2007 2008
2009 2010
Global Design Effort
Project
LHC Physics
Baseline configuration
Reference Design
TODAY
Technical Design
ILC RD Program
Bids to Host Site Selection
International Mgmt
8
Possible Experiments are being Studied as Concepts
GLD
4th Concept

• Current set of concepts formed beginning in 2004

LDC
http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/concepts
9

• The GDE Plan and Schedule

2005 2006 2007 2008
2009 2010
Global Design Effort
Project
LHC Physics
Baseline configuration
Detector Outline Documents
Reference Design
TODAY
Detector Concept Report (issued w/ RDR)
Technical Design
http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/concepts
ILC RD Program
Bids to Host Site Selection
International Mgmt
10
ILC Plan for Two Detectors

• ILCSC Scope Document
• Scope under review
• GDE IR Design
• 2 ? 20 mr recently changed to 14 ? 14 mr
• WWS Arguments for 2 IRs/Detectors
• Snowmass Proceedings

http//www.fnal.gov/directorate/icfa/LC_parameters
.pdf
Active full detectors being developed
 GLD LDC SiD 4th
Referred to as concepts
11
Case for Two Complementary Detectors

• Confirmation and Scientific Redundancy
• Complementarity, Collider Options
• Competition
• Efficiency, Reliability, Insurance
• Sociology, Scientific Opportunity
• Historical lessons
• This will be expressed in the DCR

http//www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C0508141/proc/p
apers/PLEN0059.PDF
12
Beyond the DCR

• GDE plans TDR at end of 2009
• Experiments must remain on same timeline as
  machine ? Detector TDRs 2010 ?
• synchronize detectors with the machine
• TDRs require significant resources over time
• 2 years? or more?
• How do we get there?
• Downselect of detectors?
• Authority to do this?
• Intermediate step? CDR?
• Discussions in WWS, with GDE and ILCSC
• Possibly CDRs in 2007/8

13
University Detector RD in US

• FY06 was the fourth year of support for detector
  RD from the agencies since it was first
  organized by the LCSGA (formerly USLCSG) and the
  ALCPG
• FY05 LCDRD funds FY06 LCDRD funds
• 700,000 DOE 1,048,000 - DOE
• 117,000 NSF 300,000 - NSF

33 projects 26 universities/labs
25 projects 25 universities
http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/lcdrd/fy05-awards.h
tml http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/lcdrd/fy06-awar
ds.html
14
U.S. LCDRD Program

• FY05 FY06
• Topic Projects Funding Projects Funding
• 0.817M
  1.348M
• 
  DOE 0.700M
  DOE 1.048M
• 
  NSF 0.117M
  NSF .300M
• LEP 5 15.7 6 12.4
• VXD 1 9.0 4 12.5
• TRK 8 32.6 8 36.7
• CAL 9 39.0 13 42.3
• PID(mu) 2 3.8 2
  5.4
• no. of projects 25 33
• WWS RD Panel reviewed the scope of the global
  program, and noted there was effort on most
  topics, particle ID other than muon, and forward
  tracking being noteable weaknesses
• (we are planning to support some particle
  ID, and forward tracking) In general, all areas
  active.

15
LCDRD FY06 ProjectsLEP,VXD, Tracking
16
LCDRD FY06 ProjectsCalorimetry, PID/Muons
17
Global Organization

• World wide Study (of the Phy. Det. for
  Future Lin. ee- Colliders)
• http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/
• Co-chairs H.Yamamoto, F. Richard, J. Brau
• Workshops 2004 Paris
• 2005 Stanford 397 participants
• 2006 Bangalore 326
  participants
• 2007 DESY
• Coordinates ILC Detector RD world-wide
• ALCPG (American Linear Collider Physics
  Group)
• http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/alcpg/
• Regional workshops (2005 Snowmass (650), 2006
  Vancouver)
• Detector and Physics RD in the Americas
• Co-chairs M. Oreglia, J. Brau
• GDE
• WWS co-chairs are members
• RD Board C. Damerell (WWS RD Panel Chair)
  member

18
WWS RD Panel

• Created by WWS, Spring 2005
• J-C.Brient, IN3P3 C.Damerell, RAL (chair)
  R. Frey, OREGON
• H.J.Kim, KYUNGPOOK W. Lohmann, DESY
  D.Peterson, CORNELL
• Y. Sugimoto, KEK T.Takeshita, SHINSHU
  H.Weerts, ARGONNE
• Input from all RD groups and Concepts
• Compiled global data, analyzed for gaps
• ILC Detector Research and Development
• Status Report and Urgent Requirements for
  Funding
• http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/RD
  Report-final.pdf

19
Detector RD - WWS

• RD Panel Report
• http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/RD
  Report-final.pdf
• Urgent needs require 32M and 1870 man-years over
  
• next 3-5 years - globally
• Established support over 3-5 years 15M and
• 1160 man-years - globally
• Translating man-years to dollars (100k/man-year)
• 33M/yr established over 4 years, 22M/yr more
  required
• Support notably behind in North America and Japan
• Planning global review of RD
• With GDE RD Board and WWS-OC

20
FY07 University Detector RD in US

• We are organizing ourselves in anticipation for
  increased funding in FY07 discussed 3M with
  agencies
• (5 year RD plan being developed by ALCPG)
• Encourgement led to developing a proposal early
  for a few (9) high priority, urgent efforts
  (1M)
• followed by annual round for another 2M
• Supplemental proposal prepared this summer
• 1 call for abstracts (received 22)
• 2 selection of highest priorities/urgent needs
  (9)

http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/lcdrd/supplement-06
a.html
21
FY07 U.S. LCDRD Proposal

• FY07 proposals will be accepted for continuing
  and new projects from DOE/NSF funding
• One year proposals (third year of 3 year cycle)
• Anticipated timeline
• December 15, 2006 status reports
• and new project descriptions due
• May awards announced - revised
  budgets/descriptions
• September, 2007 funded year begins
• details will be posted on ALCPG web page

22
Test Beams

• The detector RD program will need high quality
  test beams over the next few years.
• WWS Test Beam Panel
• Surveyed community on needs and facilties
• Fermilab test beam good for hadrons
• IMPORTANT Possible Special Role for SLAC
• High energy electron beams
• Note requirements for detector tests different
  from machine
• 1 particle per pulse
• Several projects are interested in this
  possibility
• EM cal, tracking, vertex detectors
• Could be complemented by other interests (eg.
  Super B)

23
Silicon Detector (SiD) Workshop SLACOctober
26-28, 2006

• http//www-sid.slac.stanford.edu/SLAC-06-workshop/
  Workshop06.asp
• subsystem status and performance studies, SiD RD
  plans, SiD contributions for the Detector Concept
  Report, SiD Conceptual Design Report, recent
  progress on the machine design and on ILC physics
• DRAFT PROGRAM
• http//www-sid.slac.stanford.edu/SLAC-06-workshop/
  Draft20Agenda20for20SiD20Workshop20October20
  26.doc
• October 26
• 130-400 subgroup parallel meetings
• 430-600 plenary
• October 27
• 830-600 plenary/discussion
• dinner
• October 28
• 900-1230 plenary/discussion
• REGISTRATION http//www-sid.slac.stanford.edu/SLA
  C-06-workshop/register.asp

24
New weekly RD Tele-meetings

• Replaces bi-weekly LCD study group organized by
  SLAC
• http//www-sldnt.slac.stanford.edu/nld/meetings/in
  dex.htm
• and Fermilab weekly ILC RD meeting
• ALCPG Physics and Detector RD Meeting
• http//ilcagenda.cern.ch/categoryDisplay.py?categI
  d87
• Weekly meeting to exchange results and
  information about ILC physics studies and
  detector RD
• open to everybody
• organized jointly by Fermilab SLAC
• Thursdays, 11 AM PDT, 1 PM CDT

25
Future Meetings

• SLAC October 26-28, 2006
• SiD Workshop
• Valencia November, 2006
• ECFA/GDE
• Beijing February, 2007
• ACFA/GDE
• Hamburg June, 2007
• LCWS 2007 (joint with GDE)
• Fermilab Next summer/fall
• Joint GDE / ALCPG meeting

26
Conclusions

• ILC Detector RD urgently needed
• global effort
• Many opportunities to participate
• New groups invited to join effort

27

• backup

28
Detector Outline Documents

• 4 Outline Documents were prepared in
• Spring 2006 leading up to the Bangalore LCWS
• Contents
• Description of the detector concept
• Performance estimates w.r.t. physics benchmarks
• Required RD and its status
• Rough costing estimate

See http//physics.uoregon.edu/lc/wwstudy/concep
ts
29
FY06 review

• 36 projects for FY06 from univ. and small labs
• 2.828 M limited by realization of limited
  availability of funds
• 24 continuations of efforts supported in FY05
• 12 requests for new projects.
• Review teams of two or three experts looking at
  each of the specific topics
• Executive committee of six independently
  reviewing all of the proposals.
• Conflict of interest was considered carefully,
  and dealt with to avoid inappropriate influence
  in the review process.
• Evaluation of each proposal for the following
  factors
• RATING overall quality of the research plan and
  goals, and the strength of the team to carry out
  the objectives (excellent, good, satisfactory,
  poor)
• RELEVANCE the relevance of the project to the
  linear collider detectors (critical, important,
  useful, irrelevant)
• CONCEPTS  the importance of the work (except for
  the LEP - luminosity, energy, polarization
  proposals) to an active linear collider detector
  concept (critical, important, useful, irrelevant)
• critical that project contributes to advancing
  detector technology for specific sub-detector
  capabilities of priority for the ILC physics
  program

30
Grannis, HEPAP. July 2006
31
Global Perspective (WWS RD Panel)

• US Detector RD effort lags behind Europe

Fig 1. Urgent RD support levels over the next
3-5 years, by funding country or region.
'Established' levels are what people think they
will be able to get under current conditions, and
'total required' are what they would need to
establish proof-of-principle for their project.
32
Detector Concept Report

• Physics
• Concepts
• Based on four detector concept DOD's
• The goal
• We can do the ILC physics
• We have different and complementary solutions
• We have a clear vision on how to reach the goals
  (RD)
• We have some understanding on the cost for these
  detectors
• Integrated presentation of Concepts
• Case for Two Detectors/IRs

33
Detector Concept Report

• WWS has established teams of editors for the
  companion volume, the DCR
• Physics editors - K. Moenig, A. Djouadi, M.
  Yamaguchi, Y. Okada, M. Oreglia, J. Lykken
• Detector editors T. Behnke, C. Damerell, J.
  Jaros, A. Miyamoto
• Cost analysis of the concepts M. Breidenbach,
  H. Maki, H. Videau interacting with GDE Cost
  Board
• Active during VLCWS06
• http//www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php